The R262K Substitution Combined with H51Y in HIV-1 Subtype B Integrase Confers Low-Level Resistance against Dolutegravir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical studies have shown that integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) can be used effectively against HIV-1 infection. To date, no resistance substitution has been found in INSTI-naive patients treated with the new integrase inhibitor dolutegravir (DTG). In a recent selection study with DTG, using a virus bearing the H51Y substitution in integrase, the emergence of an R to K substitution at position 262 (R262K) was observed. We characterized this double mutant with respect to integrase strand transfer activity and susceptibility to DTG both biochemically and in tissue culture. We showed that the addition of R262K to H51Y decreased recombinant integrase strand transfer activity but improved integrase DNA-binding affinity, compared to wild-type or H51Y-containing enzymes. The defect in strand transfer activity did not translate into a decrease in HIV-1 infectivity. The combination of H51Y and R262K substitutions slightly decreased susceptibility to DTG (fold change = 1.87) in cell-based resistance assays. Although viral replication was not affected and enzyme efficiency was impaired by the addition of R262K to H51Y, there was an overall increase in the level of biochemical drug resistance against DTG. Our findings suggest that the R at position 262 plays an important role in DNA binding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".